About your Search

20121208
20121208
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)
just lost re-election and the eight or so seats. on the other hand, he still has a very diverse caucus in terms of ideology and it's going to be very difficult. you'll notice in hiss comments he didn't say no to 37%. that said, if he agreed to 37% and he's basically bilateral talks with the president, who says the kwaux is going to approve that. he could end up with a lot of egg on his face if he agrees with the president on this, they go forward with the vote, and it doesn't pass. >> david, the office of management and budget, omb, asking government agencies to figure out what they would cut if we do go over this fiscal cliff. talking a trillion dollars in cuts over ten years. that would mean furloughs for some federal workers, slower hiring, outside contracting, the closer we get to the cliff, the more real it begins to seem. how does that then change the negotiations? >> well, i think it's all part of the political pressure the white house is trying to apply to the congressional republicans. we saw the same thing in '11 when we had the near government shutdown and the dispute over t
'reilly. thanks for watching us tonight. g.o.p. and post election blues. that's the subject of this evening's talking points memo many believe the president has the upper hand in the fiscal cliff negotiations. if we gopher 00 cliff republicans think they will get most of the blame. if they give in to tax hikes conservatives believe they will infuriate their base. senator rand paul even believes that since they have such little leverage in the talks of president obama. well, republicans should just get out of the way and let the democrats raise taxes as much as they want. and then let the president take responsibility for party of high taxes. now can i understand senator paul's thinking especially given the fact that the president has already announced ahead of his mano a mano meeting can john boehner that he won't concede an inch on tax cuts. this republican defeatism news broke of jim demint's departure from the senate yesterday. is he a tea party warrior and demint is a hero to part of the g.o.p.'s 2010 midterm route. now he is off to head off a think tank the heritage foundation. let's f
that has to do with coal. democrat, republican, marxist, whatever. whoever you would elect from west virginia they're going to vote a certain way on coal. and the fact that we now have this incredibly distributed development because of the fracking boom means a lot of different places now are geographically playing. that goes two ways. one way is we produce more senators from the state of west virginia and how they vote. the other is we produce this broad grassroots activactivism. >> look at this last election. why was president obama as muted as he was about climate and about oil and gas and coal production? well, virginia, colorado, ohio, pennsylvania. these are -- >> michigan. >> the way our electoral college is, we only worry about ten states invested in oil and fwas production. >> somes back to the economics as well. i look at my home state of pennsylvania where we had the early stages of huge boom of marcellus shale. hundreds of wells deployed. some companies are down to a couple wells. why? because the price has plummeted. the reason it's relevant to the politics is if this is
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)